M/s Jayesh A Dalal, a proprietorship firm, (the Appellant) is a registered assessee under GST having GSTN: 09AAVPD9061B1ZK.

As per Appellant, there is an agreement between Director, State Urban Development Agency (herein after referred to as “SUDA”), and M/s Jayesh A Dalalfor Preparation of Detailed Project Report (DPR) for Ghaziabad NN ULB (District – Ghaziabad) in Meerut Cluster No. 14 and providing Project Management Consultancy (PMC) services for Project under Beneficiary Led Construction in 18 Clusters vide work order no. 1190/01/29/HFA/ 2018-19 dated 16/01/2019.

Accordingly, the Appellant has submitted an application dated 06.11.2020, before the Authority for Advance Ruling Uttar Pradesh and sought Advance Ruling as follows : –

Whether the Project Development Service (i.e. Detailed Project Report Service) and Project Management Consultancy services (`PMCS`) provided by the applicant to the recipient under the Contract from State Urban Development Authority (herein after referred as “SUDA”) and the Project Management Consultancy services (`PMC`) under the Contract for PMAY would qualify as an activity in relation to function entrusted to Panchayat or Municipality under Article 243G or Article 243W respectively, of the Constitution of India?

If answer to first question is in affirmative then, whether such services provided by the applicant would qualify as Pure services (excluding works contract service or composite supplies involving supply of any goods) as provided in serial number 3 of Notification No. 12/2017- Central Tax (Rate) dated 28 June, 2017, as amended (S. No. 3A) by Notification No. 2/2018- Central Tax (Rate) dated 25 January, 2018 issued under Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (`CGST`) and corresponding Notifications No. – KA.N.I.-2-843/X1- 9 (47) / 17-UP. Act-1 – 2017 – Order – (10) – 2017 Lucknow, dated June 30, 2017 issued under Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (`UPGST Act`), where the Project cost includes the cost of service rendered along with reimbursement of cost of procurement of goods for rendering such service, and, thus, be eligible for exemption from levy of CGST and UPGST, respectively.

The Authority for Advance Ruling, vide Order No. 72/2021 dated 21.01.2021 ruled that:

• Project Development Service provided by the applicant to the State Urban Development Authority and the Project Management Consultancy services (`PMC`) under the Contract for PMAY will not qualify as an activity in relation to function entrusted to Panchayat or Municipality under Article 243G or Article 243W respectively, of the Constitution of India.
• As the answer to first question is in negative, question number 2 becomes redundant. 5) Being aggrieved with. the Order No. 72/2021 dated 21.01.2021, the Appellant filed this appeal
• application

Grounds of appeal submitted by the Appellant:-

The Appellant made the following grounds for filing of appeal:

6.1) the Authority for Advance Ruling, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh had passed a non-speaking order without proper analysis of the facts of the case.

6.2) The activities involved in preparation of detailed project report (DPR) and project management consultancy (PMC) services are pure professional consultancy service i.e. consulting engineer. In other words, there is no involvement / supplies of any types of goods or materials in this work order.

6.3) SUDA deducts GST-TDS amount from each and every payment made to the Appellant under section 51 of the CGST Act, 2017 so SUDA is considered here as a Government body for exemption from GST under Sl. No. 3 (Heading 9954) of the Notification No. 12/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017.

6.4) The Appellant also relied upon various Advance Ruling Authority Judgments to vindicate their stand